FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2392   2393   2394   2395   2396   2397   2398   2399   2400   2401   2402   2403   2404   2405   2406   2407   2408   2409   2410   2411   2412   2413   2414   2415   2416  
2417   2418   2419   2420   2421   2422   2423   2424   2425   2426   2427   2428   2429   2430   2431   2432   2433   2434   2435   2436   2437   2438   2439   2440   2441   >>   >|  
nt in import to _whosoever_ and _whatsoever_. The former, _whoso_, being used many times in the Bible, and occasionally also by the poets, as by Cowper, Whittier, and others, can hardly be said to be obsolete; though Wells, like Churchill, pronounced it so, in his first edition. [189] "'The man is prudent which speaks little.' This sentence is incorrect, because _which_ is a pronoun of the neuter gender."--_Murray's Exercises_, p. 18. "_Which_ is also a relative, but it is of [the] neuter gender. It is also interrogative."--_Webster's Improved Gram._, p. 26. For oversights like these, I cannot account. The relative _which_ is of all the genders, as every body ought to know, who has ever heard of the _horse which_ Alexander rode, of the _ass which_ spoke to Balaam, or of any of the _animals_ and _things_ which Noah had with him in the ark. [190] The word _which_ also, when taken in its _discriminative_ sense (i.e. to distinguish some persons or things from others) may have a construction of this sort; and, by ellipsis of the noun after it, it may likewise bear a resemblance to the double relative _what_: as, "I shall now give you two passages; and request you to point out _which_ words are mono-syllables, _which_ dis-syllables, _which_ tris-syllables, and _which_ poly-syllables."--_Bucke's Gram._, p. 16. Here, indeed, the word _what_ might be substituted for _which_; because that also has a discriminative sense. Either would be right; but the author might have presented the same words and thoughts rather more accurately, thus: "I shall now give you two passages; and request you to point out which words are monosyllables; which, dissyllables; which, trissyllables; and which, polysyllables." [191] The relative _what_, being equivalent to _that which_, sometimes has the demonstrative word _that_ set after it, by way of pleonasm; as, "_What_ I tell you in darkness, _that_ speak ye in light, and _what_ ye hear in the ear, _that_ preach ye upon the house-tops."--_Matt._, x, 27. In _Covell's Digest_, this text is presented as "_false syntax_," under the new and needless rule, "Double relatives always supply two cases."--_Digest of E. Gram._, p. 143. In my opinion, to strike out the word _that_, would greatly weaken the expression: and so thought our translators; for no equivalent term is used in the original. [192] As for Butler's method of parsing these words by _always recognizing a noun as being_ "UNDERSTOOD" _before t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2392   2393   2394   2395   2396   2397   2398   2399   2400   2401   2402   2403   2404   2405   2406   2407   2408   2409   2410   2411   2412   2413   2414   2415   2416  
2417   2418   2419   2420   2421   2422   2423   2424   2425   2426   2427   2428   2429   2430   2431   2432   2433   2434   2435   2436   2437   2438   2439   2440   2441   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

relative

 

syllables

 

Digest

 

neuter

 

gender

 
things
 

presented

 

discriminative

 

equivalent

 

request


passages

 

thoughts

 
accurately
 

monosyllables

 
trissyllables
 

dissyllables

 

author

 
substituted
 
method
 

recognizing


polysyllables

 

UNDERSTOOD

 

Either

 

parsing

 

pleonasm

 

needless

 
syntax
 
Covell
 

translators

 

Double


thought

 

weaken

 

opinion

 

strike

 
relatives
 

expression

 

supply

 
darkness
 

Butler

 

greatly


demonstrative

 

original

 
preach
 

persons

 

speaks

 

sentence

 

prudent

 

edition

 

incorrect

 

pronoun